This is installment 4 of the discussion of yesterday's US Airways A320 crash in New York. From the previous thread, please note what is believed to be the first pic of the actual impact of this aircraft:

I can say right now the flight and cabin crew of US Airways Flight 1549 should win a LOT of awards for their extraordinary skills in bringing down the plane safely and getting everyone off the plane with relatively few injuries. It is truly one of the miraculous events I've ever seen in a long, long time.

In case y'all are interested, Mayor Bloomberg at this time (on MSNBC) is handing out certificates to all involved w/ the rescue. They have said they will have live-feed of the aircraft extraction from the river today. regards...jack

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 6):I can say right now the flight and cabin crew of US Airways Flight 1549 should win a LOT of awards for their extraordinary skills in bringing down the plane safely and getting everyone off the plane with relatively few injuries.

Mayor Bloomberg during a news conference just announced that the captian and crew will receive keys to the city.

I think in this particular case the A320's full flight-envelope protection incorporated into its flight-control software must have been very welcome.

It probably helped keeping the aircraft stable enabling the pilots to concentrate on finding a place to put the aircraft on the water at a high angle of attack at the lowest possible speed without stalling the aircraft & go nose down.. before and after contact with the water.

So there are a couple things I'd like to mention (again haha.) I'm not going to try and quote stuff from the other thread however.

First of all, from what I can see, EVERY SINGLE previous successful water ditch that I've seen mentioned in here has been a rear engined plane such as the tupolev / 727 / DC8. I'd have to venture a guess here and say that this isn't a coincidence. It's ironic, because it seems like some of these previous stories are being posted to discount how "impossible" it is to ditch a plane intact, when in reality it actually reiterates how EXTREMELY rare it is for this to happen with a traditional twin engine / under wing AC. So in this respect, maybe it is a first? I mean the underbelly of a 727 or DC8 is almost totally free of obstructions/drag.. no risk of hooking an engine with catastrophic consequences (even if it breaks free from the pylon, the drag might still be enough to pull a wing under and destroy the entire fuselage.)

Another interesting note (something I mentioned way earlier) is the continued relationships to the Gimli Glider incident where the pilots had glider training.

The last thing I thought I'd mention is relating to all the posts about FBW having helped this situation. This simply isn't true - in the case of a double engine failure, the Airbus defaulted back to it's most basic Direct Law control mode, where every input was sent to the control surfaces untouched/altered. Even worse, it's highly likely that he was dealing with VERY poor control characteristics due to low hydraulic pressures and slow airspeeds.

And to think that this pilot will soon be 'told' that he 'has' to retire because of age. How ironic.

Maybe thats not such a bad thing? How big of an impact can he have if he were to go into teaching crisis management? Teaching his skills to a new generation of pilots and others. No one will question his experience thats for sure!

Actually, from what I've read one thing the pilot did was activate what's known as "ditching mode" on the A320. What this does is close off all vents and intakes that could cause water to leak into the plane really fast, and that's why the plane floated just long enough to get everyone out of the plane safely.

The pilot was also really lucky the plane came to a rest in the water at the point where there was a lot of boats nearby that could pick up people. That's why several New York Waterway ferry boats got to the scene of the ditching in only a few minutes and got everyone off the plane quickly.

Quoting SirOmega (Reply 12):The last thing I thought I'd mention is relating to all the posts about FBW having helped this situation. This simply isn't true - in the case of a double engine failure, the Airbus defaulted back to it's most basic Direct Law control mode, where every input was sent to the control surfaces untouched/altered. Even worse, it's highly likely that he was dealing with VERY poor control characteristics due to low hydraulic pressures and slow airspeeds.

We don't know that as of yet. The engines may have been badly damaged, and not produce sufficient thrust for continued flight, but we don't know how much power they were delivering to the hydraulics and electrics. I suppose it'll all come out int he investigation.

Quoting EstorilM (Reply 11):First of all, from what I can see, EVERY SINGLE previous successful water ditch that I've seen mentioned in here has been a rear engined plane such as the tupolev / 727 / DC8

I'm pretty certain all the DC-8s I know of have the engines under the wing.

the media has been praising the pilot for this intricate water landing. i thought airplanes were designed to float and/or not break during water landings. not to discount his skills or heroism whatsoever... i'm just wondering, was it really that difficult?

Quoting Gorgos (Reply 3):His wife will probably force him to retire anyway after this incident

And this logic I don't understand. First of all statitically the chances for him to get involved in a second accident are practicaly zero. Secondly I think he proved to be a skilled pilot with good survival chances in emergencies. Nothing to worry about for the misses....

One other thing that crossed my mind. Maybe it is discussed before in this thread, I've only read the last two, in that case I am sorry for bringing it up. But what I was wondering is if they couldn't make it to Teterboro for an emergency landing? Or maybe the risk for people on the ground would have been too high. any thoughts on that?

There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...